June
9, 2000 VOL. 29 NO. 22 | SEARCH ASIAWEEKLetters
Singapore
Views: "The censorial sentiment is so pervasive that it is crippling. It
prevents citizens from raising questions, voicing opinions and acting on
matters that affect their polity."
from James Gomez's new book [May 12]

Academic liberals like James Gomez presume Singapore's people have no mind
of their own in discerning a government which bests suits their needs: the
average citizen is meek, afraid to speak his or her mind, especially over
politics and democracy ["Mental Block," BOOKS, May 12].

In truth, Singaporeans, especially the younger generation to which I belong,
are individuals full of ideals and ideas and not afraid to express them.
Not all of our government's actions are to be defended, particularly its
intolerance of opposition, but to allow firebrand democracy in a multiracial
society is to court disaster. People have to be held accountable for their
words and actions and government control ensures that. After all, economic
prosperity and social stability are fair trade-offs for the rampant shootings
that come with the "right to bear arms" in romanticized democracies. As
for the supposed dichotomy between "Singapore's market sophistication and
political authoritarianism," it is in part resolved by political controls
resulting in good economic governance and preventing the corruption and
cronyism prevalent in other Southeast Asian nations.

Singapore is a young nation and will take time to grow into a democracy.
The British took three centuries. The signs are already encouraging, with
a "speaker's corner" soon to allow for opinions to be aired. But more important
is the need for a matured population educated enough to temper enthusiasm
with realism and criticism with sensibility. Chow Ken Lunn
Singapore
Seoul On Pre-Summit Moves
Regarding "An Axis Gyrating Out of Control" [INTELLIGENCE, June 2], I would
like to clarify some parts that, we believe, will mislead your readers.
First, the allegation in your article that there is disagreement between
Seoul and Washington on the issues of North Korean missiles and nuclear
weapons is groundless. The two governments have maintained close consultations
on how to deal with those issues and share a common position on the manner
in which the inter-Korean summit should be conducted. The U.S. government
has expressed full confidence in the Korean government in this regard.

The article also said that "Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was reportedly
so furious over what she perceived as a slight" over the fact that our foreign
minister had been dispatched to Beijing to give a briefing on the June inter-Korean
summit that she refused to meet Vice Minister Ban Ki Moon. The fact is that
the foreign minister's trip to Beijing had been arranged long before the
agreement on the summit was concluded and the vice minister was dispatched
to Washington after the announcement in view of the importance of Korea-U.S.
relations. The vice minister did indeed meet with Secretary Albright in
her office on May 1 for 45 minutes, with senior U.S. administration officials
attending.

I deeply regret that this article was based on inaccurate information which
will mislead your readers about the current status of close coordination
between the Republic of Korea and the United States, even though we are,
at the same time, working to better our relationship with China.Oh Hong KeunMinister and Government Spokesman
Government Information Agency
Seoul

We regret the error on the Ban-Albright meeting -- Editors.
Correction
Company No. 17 in the table "IBRA's Top Debtors" [BUSINESS, June 2] was
misnamed. The correct name is Rajawali Group.